Servers as a karma ladder?

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 17:13:41

FeignedSanity wrote:

I kind of second this notion, as far as having a goal. I know that the idea of a surviving settlement is in itself a goal, but that can be a bit ambiguous for some. It might also deal with some of the more experienced players that grief because they've become bored and have nothing to strive for. Maybe the more I think on it, I'm torn. Because if you've gotten to server 1 and have a thriving city, then the bored griefer is back to square one. But if you grief and get killed by the competent players that catch you, then you have something to work towards again.
I definitely think it's an interesting idea, but there is a real danger in splitting up an already small player base. Maybe only use the first 3 or 4 servers for the karma ladder?

I am not a griefer (just wanted to say that) But i agree with you, this idea of only using 3 or 4 servers is nice.
Also if all the griefers and killers try to get to server 1, than server 2 will be a really nice place xD

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 17:20:52

Drakulon wrote:

FeignedSanity wrote:
I kind of second this notion, as far as having a goal. I know that the idea of a surviving settlement is in itself a goal, but that can be a bit ambiguous for some. It might also deal with some of the more experienced players that grief because they've become bored and have nothing to strive for. Maybe the more I think on it, I'm torn. Because if you've gotten to server 1 and have a thriving city, then the bored griefer is back to square one. But if you grief and get killed by the competent players that catch you, then you have something to work towards again.
I definitely think it's an interesting idea, but there is a real danger in splitting up an already small player base. Maybe only use the first 3 or 4 servers for the karma ladder?
I am not a griefer (just wanted to say that) But i agree with you, this idea of only using 3 or 4 servers is nice.
Also if all the griefers and killers try to get to server 1, than server 2 will be a really nice place xD

LMAO, I never even thought of that. Server two is the holy beacon of non assholes cause they're all busy trying to harass the "golden server". Beautiful irony.

+1 for you

Potjeh · 2018-05-02 17:24:49

I like the idea of ban on respawning to lineage. But I think it should be two hours instead of permanent, to get around the problem of a family running out of eligible active players.

Thorware · 2018-05-02 17:30:01

Consider this idea:

If you die, you can never be reborn to the same family (anyone with a common Eve ancestor), UNLESS:

If you die of old age, you unlock a special "get reborn into family" button. If no family mothers are available, it can place you in a holding state to wait for a young girl to grow older or for a birth cooldown to end before you come back, and you can always choose to stop waiting and get reborn normally. Possibly a player reborn this way is indicated (glow/icon/etc) so mothers are incentivized to keep a baby born this way, someone that already knows the town, is invested, and wants to help. If you are abandoned anyway, that's the end for you in this village.

Benefits:

1. If you kill a griefer, they are banished from your family, and in all likelihood your entire village, permanently. (Eves wandering in could potentially give them a second chance.)

2. It's common to want to see what happens with a village you have spent a lot of time in, and help develop it further. By surviving to old age you demonstrate that you thrived in the village, so you are able to return to that village as your reward for a good job.

3. If you mess up and die accidentally, you lose the ability to satisfy that desire to see how the village continues. That's a harsh death punishment just like Jason would like, without preventing you from spawning again and continuing to play if you like, just somewhere else.

4. The survival of a village is the story of a family/dynasty/country, all working together for common long-term survival. As people die prematurely, they are "voted off the island," and new blood will be born in instead. (As an aside, I believe bell tower construction should be restricted to a single family line.)

5. This solution involves no "black magic" or complex player voting, it's simply a tweak of the "get reborn" mechanic. It also seems relatively simple to implement.

6. This solution eliminates baby suiciding as a means to get reborn into an old town.

A drawback is that if a village is very successful and lasts a very long time, if the player base is too small, eventually everyone will accidentally die sooner or later and eventually there will be nobody left to be born into the town. A solution might be to have a cooldown of something like 6 hours to get reborn into the family line instead of a permanent lock.

Murder will sting in this solution because someone just ruined your chance to keep playing in your area. But murder is terrible, and that's life.

I realize that this approach is a small violation of the "one hour, one life" concept to live a totally new story in the next hour, but I think that the benefits and using it as a reward for a life well lived (new game+) outweigh this violation.

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 17:35:25

Honestly I'm really happy you (Jason) took the time to read my message and had some real though on it. I've thought a lot about this game, about many things regarding this game and this is one of my personal takeaways. I agree with all the pros, every life is meant to mean something. Every hour is supposed to be a new experience and that's what I like. I think you hit the nail on the head with the minecraft creative mode reference because I've been feeling much the same way. A lot of people want this game to be like that, which makes sense, it's really popular. But if I wanted that, I'd play that, or any of the other 14 games that offer that.

As far as being banned, I may have been a bit hasty in using the B word. My initial thoughts are banning but when I think on the negative implications, I can see that that may not be the best solution (for reasons 1 & 3). Maybe there should be a generation limit, like you have to wait at least 4 generations before you can be born back into that lineage. Then it is essentially a different experience, because "bob the blacksmith" isn't around anymore and everything has changed. That seems to solve those two issues, no?

Last edited by FeignedSanity (2018-05-02 17:51:43)

thirdplanet · 2018-05-02 17:49:21

jasonrohrer wrote:

Not sure that I've heard the notion of banning everyone from repeat lineage before....

That means that you'd pretty much only get a chance to play in a given city once, unless you migrated back to it with a different lineage later?
Yeah, that certainly aligns with the spirit of the game.

I'm trying to list all of the impacts this would have on the game, and there are tons of them, and many seem to be good:
1. Every life is truly different, meaningful, precious, fleeting, etc.
2. Being Eve means something. You are always founding a new city that has potential to grow into the next mega city.
3. Being born to an Eve means something (you are one of the new city founders).
4. Baby suicide won't get you back to the city, but will eventually just stick you as an Eve when you run out of villages to spawn into.
5. Every baby is precious, because there's a limited supply that will come through your village in the immediate future. If you let them all die, there will be no one left to be born to your village. That brand new, clueless player may be your only hope. Better train them up right.
6. Enforcement of law has enormous meaning. Easily deals with repeat, trans-life griefers in the same village.

Negatives:
1. Every city is always dying through lack of new blood. Once every active player has played in that city, the city will have no more babies. This concern might be imaginary, given the ebb and flow of the player pool, time zones, etc.
2. Seems to subvert the "two tribes" emergent competition. Villages are supposed to be competing for a greater share of incoming babies based on how good they are at producing food, warmth, etc. The youngest village automatically has an unnatural, insurmountable advantage. (Though currently, a young village has no chance if all babies are suiciding there, even if they are better at taking care of babies.)
3. The longer a player plays in a given day, the less and less interesting the game becomes. Perhaps they start in some of the biggest cities, but each life is in a less established city, until finally they are stuck being Eve over and over again.

Obviously, a lot of players like working on the same thing life after life. They want OHOL to be a different game than it's supposed to be, and they will be angry and vocal if I subvert this any further. I'm not so worried about this, because I do need to make the game I'm trying to make, and not remake minecraft creative mode with parenting or whatever.

I've always wanted dying in this game to be a HOLY FUCK emotionally-rattling moment. This life is over, I can't believe it, I'll never see any of you again, please remember me, goodbye, I love you all. I want you to physically weep every time.
I think the game is pretty close to this if you play occasionally. The first time you live to old age with your grandchildren running around you as you die.
But being born back to the same village in the very next life subverts this somewhat.
Being born back at some point in the future can amplify the meaning, though... like being born as the grandchild of your granddaughter.

I *love* this! To be honest I actually find myself getting most bored when I am born to the same village, because I lived my life there and completed what I wanted to complete (or didn't!), and once I died people moved on. When I'm reborn, I already know the whole layout and everything but I am a baby so it just takes a frustratingly long time to get back to a place where I can be productive.

So, I don't think the game becomes less interesting necessarily just through playing longer per day. Eve runs are cool, and like you said, it becomes more about a chance to set up your own megalopolis, having lived through others and seen their follies.

Eve-finding missions have become such a cool part of living in an established city... several times now, some of the most poignant moments of my lives have been when I was growing old in an established city and we found ourselves without the possibility for new babies. So we find the youngest of us, kit him out with all our gear (backpack filled with pies, full clothes, a cart and horse if we have it, etc), make sure his home marker is set, and send him out to find an Eve to bring back to our city. Its exciting, it's dramatic, it's sad (we usually know we won't ever see him again, but we're filled with hope that he'll be successful and reinvigorate our town)

Anyway I love this!!! I'm so excited about the potential for this to become a feature, I hate being reborn in the same town over and over and I hate it when others are as well. Its really frustrating when people get super possessive IRL over a particular settlement, and you have all these boss(y) babies running around yelling at you for making changes to their design. Ownership is fake, thats like one of the central tenants of this game, you own nothing, nothing is permanent, move on.

Go! Bwah! · 2018-05-02 17:51:16

I'm all for cursing and blessing, especially if it can be done while the target is alive.

Segregating players based on karma would also, to some extent, segregate players based on playstyle and would probably give you the opportunity to tweak each server accordingly.

Edit to add: making it a two-dimensional grid using blesses and curses, rather than a one-dimensional ladder, would be interesting. Actually it probably wouldn't end up an orthogonal grid once you analyzed the groupings, maybe more of a wedge? Or maybe just a straight line after all but it would be fun to see

Last edited by Go! Bwah! (2018-05-02 17:57:04)

jasonrohrer · 2018-05-02 17:52:24

A repeat-lineage ban for everyone also gives the bell tower a real purpose.

If your old village is dying, you need to ring that bell to call new Eves to your city to start new family lines there. Deciding when to ring the bell can be really important, and the bell may be kept under lock and key until the right moment.

The pure ban is the cleanest way to do it. It's a rule that's easy to remember, can't be gamed, doesn't encourage a "quit now and come back in X hours" work-around, etc. And also, it's not like you will never see your city again or never work on it again. You just have to figure out how to pilgrimage there, which is interesting.

That said, if I was going to implement this, I might as well do it as a tweakable cooldown time. If I want it to be a ban, I can set it for 1000 hours or whatever. But I could also soften it... maybe two hours, or one hour. Still, any short ban will encourage people to quit and come back later. I'd only do that if it truly was impossible to keep a village going long term due to lack of new blood.

The idea of old-age granting you a "rebuy" into the same family.... I think that many skilled players will almost always live until old age, and just perpetually cycle in the same village forever. It becomes even more of an insider's club, especially if the babies are marked with golden halos or whatever.

The straight ban solution is interesting, because it has matching effects on both parents and babies. A baby only gets "one chance" to live in that glorious city, which seems unfair, but because they are precious, and the city is short on fresh-soul babies, they are much more likely to be taken care of and have a good life in that city. The current experience involves a whole lot of being left to die as a baby, even if you are born in a good city.

And the same is true for male babies to some degree. If this player knows what's up, and they happen to be born as male, keeping them around will be your only chance to have them be part of your village, ever. If you let them die, hoping for a female baby instead, that female may never come anyway.

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 18:03:22

I just want to take a minute and say how awesome it is to be the linchpin in this whole conversation. Now that I've modestly brushed my ego, I'd like to put some additional thoughts after stewing on it some more. I think the 1st con is the big sticking point. Given the scenario that a city has literally had every single player spawn into it at least once, then a city would die, through no fault of it's own. It's just a matter of player base divided by birth cooldowns. But I ask the question, is it really so bad to not be able to have a lineage live indefinitely? This opinion may differ, but I ponder on just how terrible that would be.

As far as the 3rd con, I really don't think that'd be an issue. If you've spawned into every possible lineage and are just respawning as an eve (or the children of eves), then maybe it's time to take a break. You've probably been playing for a few hours and now might be a good time to get up, get something to eat, maybe sleep, or work, or maybe socialize with IRL people (crazy thought I know XD). You take a small break, and when you come back, the face of the server has changed. New lineages have been born and cultivated and you can start burning through all those civs until break time 6 hours later.

Just additional food for thought I wanted to add. (also against the ability to "buy back" into the lineage)

TrustyWay · 2018-05-02 18:05:24

Ban is good but permanant, I dunno. Depend on how many kids you can have per life. As told before you can respawn as woman and let kids starve, banning 3 to 9 children who could have been good workers.

Last edited by TrustyWay (2018-05-02 18:05:53)

thirdplanet · 2018-05-02 18:12:47

FeignedSanity wrote:

I just want to take a minute and say how awesome it is to be the linchpin in this whole conversation. Now that I've modestly brushed my ego, I'd like to put some additional thoughts after stewing on it some more. I think the 1st con is the big sticking point. Given the scenario that a city has literally had every single player spawn into it at least once, then a city would die, through no fault of it's own. It's just a matter of player base divided by birth cooldowns. But I ask the question, is it really so bad to not be able to have a lineage live indefinitely? This opinion may differ, but I ponder on just how terrible that would be.
As far as the 3rd con, I really don't think that'd be an issue. If you've spawned into every possible lineage and are just respawning as an eve (or the children of eves), then maybe it's time to take a break. You've probably been playing for a few hours and now might be a good time to get up, get something to eat, maybe sleep, or work, or maybe socialize with IRL people (crazy thought I know XD). You take a small break, and when you come back, the face of the server has changed. New lineages have been born and cultivated and you can start burning through all those civs until break time 6 hours later.
Just additional food for thought I wanted to add. (also against the ability to "buy back" into the lineage)

For the first point - I think a decreased birth rate in a long established city is a fine feature. Early on in a settlement's history, you can rely on new births to maintain the population, but eventually you'll have to send out scouting missions to find new citizens. That's the only way that settlements can keep going after a certain point, which is good because it introduces a challenge that isn't really there currently... once you reach the top of the tech tree and you have a great settlement, the challenge drops off, but the new challenge becomes keeping your utopia populated. You have to return to exploring and venturing to bring in new blood.

For the 3rd con - that's an excellent point its like how Nintendo has little reminders in some of their games... like "hey uhh you've been playing for quite a while, maybe pause for a bit to stretch and like drink some water, look at something other than a screen?" Not a drawback at all.

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 18:14:10

TrustyWay wrote:

Ban is good but permanant, I dunno. Depend on how many kids you can have per life. As told before you can respawn as woman and let kids starve, banning 3 to 9 children who could have been good workers.

.

The only way I could see that working is if you run off into the wild to do it. If you do it in town, someone else could watch the kid you neglect. Would be an intersting way to grief, but I feel like it'd be terribly boring. You don't get to see the effect, and it's really slow. Terribly slow and not getting the satisfation of seeing your handiwork. Can't imagine too many people would do that. And you could only do it once to that lineage, you couldn't spawn back in and do it over. So even one of those terribly sad people truely exists, they would only have one chance to do it.

ryanb · 2018-05-02 18:15:04

+1 to only being born once per lineage with a cool down. I think this will result in more Eves, but it will resolve other issues.

If you do this, please add a birth timer to Eves just starting. It is near impossible to keep a baby right off the bat, and it would be sad to lose a potential player just from that initial baby.

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 18:16:28

HOLY COW GUYS I JUST THOUGHT OF SOMETHING AMAZING!!!! THIS AUTOMATICALLY MAKES MALES MUCH MORE VALUABLE!!!

Hear me out, if you have a city of nothing but women, you can't support all the babies they produce. So you let them die and add them to the pile. But now, if you do that, you'll be running through your exhaustible stockpile of babies. Long story short, you're welcome for solving all of your problems Kappa.

Last edited by FeignedSanity (2018-05-02 18:17:43)

ryanb · 2018-05-02 18:21:58

FeignedSanity wrote:

HOLY COW GUYS I JUST THOUGHT OF SOMETHING AMAZING!!!! THIS AUTOMATICALLY MAKES MALES MUCH MORE VALUABLE!!!
Hear me out, if you have a city of nothing but women, you can't support all the babies they produce. So you let them die and add them to the pile. But now, if you do that, you'll be running through your exhaustible stockpile of babies. Long story short, you're welcome for solving all of your problems Kappa.

Right! Every player is valuable. Losing a baby has weight to it unlike currently. Also, if you happen to get a newbie player he won't last long anyway and therefore won't return to your line. It makes keeping babies a better decision overall.

YAHG · 2018-05-02 18:24:58

I have seen it mentioned often suggesting a 2 hour cool down on being reborn to a lineage.

I think this is just a good idea on it's own without anything else. It just prevents you from
re-meeting people from old lives while also nerfing the part of baby suicide that is based in
going back to the village.

Thorware · 2018-05-02 18:29:25

jasonrohrer wrote:

The idea of old-age granting you a "rebuy" into the same family.... I think that many skilled players will almost always live until old age, and just perpetually cycle in the same village forever. It becomes even more of an insider's club, especially if the babies are marked with golden halos or whatever.

Aren't families in fact the ultimate "insider's club"?

Getting to know the same people, conflicts and drama, or cooperation and thriving until you start hitting map resource limits, constantly having to come up with new strategies to keep things going. That sounds compelling to me.

If a few people take ownership of the village and only get reborn to each other indefinitely, killing all outsiders... That sounds pretty similar to discord coordination on non-default servers, which is already allowed, and seemingly encouraged.

However, it's true that this would ruin the moment you describe where you are dying of old age and sad because you must say goodbye to your family and will never see them again. I think that's the most compelling reason not to reward old age deaths with family rebirths. Perhaps a difficult crafted item is required to enable the old-age family rebirth, preserving this powerful moment for typical players but allowing experts to extend their play. (Currently they do this by baby suiciding and coordinate tracking anyway.)

And there's always a chance one of the "insiders" could get murdered and instantly banished. Not such an insider anymore!

kubassa · 2018-05-02 19:07:11

I do not get most comments and suggestions in this thread. Right now if you are playing the game with a IRL family member the only way to play the game with them is to baby suicide. Taking away the ability to spawn with you whom you wish to will ruin the game for a lot of potential players and some that currently play.

Last edited by kubassa (2018-05-02 19:08:17)

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 19:10:39

Thorware wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
The idea of old-age granting you a "rebuy" into the same family.... I think that many skilled players will almost always live until old age, and just perpetually cycle in the same village forever. It becomes even more of an insider's club, especially if the babies are marked with golden halos or whatever.
Aren't families in fact the ultimate "insider's club"?
Getting to know the same people, conflicts and drama, or cooperation and thriving until you start hitting map resource limits, constantly having to come up with new strategies to keep things going. That sounds compelling to me.
If a few people take ownership of the village and only get reborn to each other indefinitely, killing all outsiders... That sounds pretty similar to discord coordination on non-default servers, which is already allowed, and seemingly encouraged.
However, it's true that this would ruin the moment you describe where you are dying of old age and sad because you must say goodbye to your family and will never see them again. I think that's the most compelling reason not to reward old age deaths with family rebirths. Perhaps a difficult crafted item is required to enable the old-age family rebirth, preserving this powerful moment for typical players but allowing experts to extend their play. (Currently they do this by baby suiciding and coordinate tracking anyway.)
And there's always a chance one of the "insiders" could get murdered and instantly banished. Not such an insider anymore!

But again, I feel like you're missing the point. I'd like to draw you back to point 2 of your previous post. It is common to want to "go back and check" on how you old family is doing. It's normal to want to go back and keep working on what you started, or indeed finish it. But that's not what this game is about, at least in my opinion, and apparently Jason's. There are already so many games that offer that, but how many offer the drama or never again seeing your family and everyone having to live on in each other's memories. You get one chance, and that's it, it's on to the new story. I find that much more compelling, personally.

Also, I think he's reffering to the "insider's club" of people's "souls", not characters.

Drakulon · 2018-05-02 19:10:54

kubassa wrote:

I do not get most comments and suggestions in this thread. Right now if you are playing the game with a IRL family member the only way to play the game with them is to baby suicide. Taking away the ability to spawn with you whom you wish to will ruin the game for a lot of potential players and some that currently play.

good point kubassa, maybe there could be some other feature that allows to play with friends (but i dont know how this would look like)

Last edited by Drakulon (2018-05-02 19:13:24)

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 19:13:38

kubassa wrote:

I do not get most comments and suggestions in this thread. Right now if you are playing the game with a IRL family member the only way to play the game with them is to baby suicide. Taking away the ability to spawn with you whom you wish to will ruin the game for a lot of potential players and some that currently play.

But I don't think that's what the game is about. Maybe make 10 out of the 15 servers for people who want to do this, sure, fine. Or maybe make it easier to host your own server, something like DST. But if you're "baby suiciding" just to play the game with your IRL friend or family, then you're ruining it for everyone else. I know people tend not to think of others, but that's what this game is all about. Thinking about others. You're actions are not for you, they are for the other people in your family. The ones living, and the ones that come after.

Last edited by FeignedSanity (2018-05-02 19:15:43)

OxPower · 2018-05-02 19:16:47

How about instead of a cooldown on the ban, we have another monument building, one that lift the ban and lets you start again. Make the building trans-generational and one time use.

Also in order to not piss off the kool kids klub of discord and, like kubasa said, the people that just want to play with friends or family, keep it to only the main default servers.

YAHG · 2018-05-02 19:17:26

Drakulon wrote:

kubassa wrote:
I do not get most comments and suggestions in this thread. Right now if you are playing the game with a IRL family member the only way to play the game with them is to baby suicide. Taking away the ability to spawn with you whom you wish to will ruin the game for a lot of potential players and some that currently play.
good point kubassa, maybe there could be some other feature that allows to play with friends (but i dont know how this would look like)

Private servers..?

FeignedSanity · 2018-05-02 19:19:04

YAHG wrote:

I have seen it mentioned often suggesting a 2 hour cool down on being reborn to a lineage.

Really? I've never even seen it mentioned anywhere, or I would've jumped right on it. I've honestly never brought it up because I know how people would react to it. I know it'll be very unpopular with a lot of people (honestly surprised how many people are a fan of my idea). Which is why I spent so much time clarifying that it was just my personal opinion when I first mentioned it.

YAHG · 2018-05-02 19:32:38

Going down one rung is pretty obvious: if your life on the previous rung ends in murder, down you go.
Climbing back up though? My initial thought is that you climb up if you live to old age on the previous rung. That would definitely slow griefers down. A full hour down there, at least, before they can get reborn in your village.

I think is good on it's own. I ended up reading more of the thread and got sidetracked. B)

I LIKE how it doesn't judge murderers only the murdered. I like how you can kill people and be evil if you
want, just there is a penalty for it. I think it is cool that you have to live to be old to get up higher, that makes
the high end lives even more and more valuable to loose <3<3<3<3<3<3.

I don't think this system relies on any of the other mechanics discussed so far in this thread.

Just imagine the responsibility of the Guard. Imagine the drama of being killed for eating seed carrots! OMG YASS!

Also imagine the pleasure of killing some fucker with your bow.. knowing he will suffer even more! Bwhahahahaha
Delicious..

Please do this even as a test, just to see if it work or if there are super big problems none of us are noticing with it.

One thing is that the less populated servers would get wiped more, depending on the demographic spread
that could make either the high or low end servers harder to play.

One thing that is SUPER cool is that the high servers are more likely to be filled with the killers than the killed. Stalking
settlements with the bow or waiting out by the watering hole with some pies is gonna be exciting as fuck!

You know they will be coming.. alone...

Will this make people travel in groups for water?

MAKE DEATH GREAT AGAIN!

Fuck yeah!

One Hour One Life Forums

#26 2018-05-02 17:13:41

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#27 2018-05-02 17:20:52

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#28 2018-05-02 17:24:49

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#29 2018-05-02 17:30:01

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#30 2018-05-02 17:35:25

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#31 2018-05-02 17:49:21

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#32 2018-05-02 17:51:16

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#33 2018-05-02 17:52:24

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#34 2018-05-02 18:03:22

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#35 2018-05-02 18:05:24

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#36 2018-05-02 18:12:47

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#37 2018-05-02 18:14:10

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#38 2018-05-02 18:15:04

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#39 2018-05-02 18:16:28

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#40 2018-05-02 18:21:58

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#41 2018-05-02 18:24:58

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#42 2018-05-02 18:29:25

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#43 2018-05-02 19:07:11

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#44 2018-05-02 19:10:39

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#45 2018-05-02 19:10:54

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#46 2018-05-02 19:13:38

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#47 2018-05-02 19:16:47

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#48 2018-05-02 19:17:26

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#49 2018-05-02 19:19:04

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

#50 2018-05-02 19:32:38

Re: Servers as a karma ladder?

Board footer